this is bbc news. i'm ben brown, live in westminster. the headlines at 2. the government loses its appeal to the supreme court. eight of the 11 judges agreed that parliament — not the government — should be responsible for triggering the brexit process. the government cannot trigger article 50 without parliament authorising that course. the brexit secretary tells mps there's no going back on exiting the eu and legislation would be introduced quickly. the world within days interest legislation to trigger article 50 and begin the formal process of withdrawal. we'll bring you the latest reaction to the supreme court ruling, and we'll be examining its impact on the upcoming brexit negotiations. build in the usa — president trump tells us car

us car manufacturers, put your new factories on american soil. rolf harris won't be giving evidence at his second trial for indecent and sexual assault as his legal team claims thejury in his previous trial ‘got it wrong'. the man who turned formula one into one of the world's biggest sports, bernie ecclestone, is replaced as chief executive after nearly a0 years in charge. and la la land tops the oscars race — with a record—equalling 1a nominations, including best picture. in a landmark ruling, the government has lost its appeal

at the supreme court over who has the authority to start the process of taking the uk out of the european union. eight of the 11 supreme court judges ruled that only mps and peers — not the government — have the authority to trigger article 50 and begin two years of negotiations. the president of the supreme court said that leaving the eu would change uk law and the rights of uk citizens — which meant parliament must be consulted. a short time ago mps were told the government would introduce legislation within days to start the formal process of leaving the eu. our political correspondent carole walker reports. this was a case with

profound implications. who should decide the process for taking the uk out of the eu? the decision, taken by 11 of the most seniorjudges in the land, was delivered to the hushed courtroom. today, by a majority of 8—3, the supreme court rules that the government cannot trigger article 50 without an act of parliament authorising it to do so. article 50 begins the formal negotiations for leaving the eu, a process which the judges said would fundamentally change uk law. the referendum is of great political significance, but the act of parliament which established it did not say what should happen as a result. so any change in the law to give effect to the referendum must be made in the only way permitted by the uk constitution,

namely by an act of parliament. the verdict was clear — the judgment spells out why the court had rejected the government's case. the government will comply with the judgment of the court and do all that is necessary to implement it. the woman who brought the case said the ruling reaffirmed that parliament is sovereign. this ruling today means that mps we have elected will rightfully have the opportunity to bring their invaluable experience and expertise to bear in helping the government select the best course in the forthcoming brexit negotiations. is this a blow to the government's brexit timetable, sir? but the government will be relieved that the court ruled that there is no legal requirement for it to consult the devolved nations, scotland, wales and northern ireland. so the focus now switches to parliament. mps and peers will not try to block the brexit process, but they could delay it. opposition parties are already

setting out the changes they will try to make to the coming legislation, changes which could affect the government's whole approach to the negotiations over britain's departure from the eu. we are very clear. we will hold them to account to protect jobs. we will hold them to account to protectjobs. account to make sure british industry does have market access, and we will not allow ourselves to become some kind of offshore tax haven. that is not what people voted for. unless the government concedes a new deal for the british people so that the british people have a say over the final arrangements between the uk and the eu, i will vote against article 50. the snp say they will table 50 amendments. the prime minister set out last week a path towards the hardest of hard brexits. i don't believe there is a majority for that in the house of commons. i certainly don't believe there is a majority for that across the country, so this is an opportunity for the house of commons to assert itself and to have a say notjust on the narrow question,

but on the broader terms of the negotiation as well. downing street said today's ruling will not affect the timetable for theresa may to begin negotiating with other eu leaders. the government will introduce a bill in the commons within days. this will be the most straightforward bill possible to give effect to the decision of the people and respect the supreme court's judgment. the purpose of this bill is simply to give the government the power to revoke article 50 and begin the process of leaving the european union. but the scene is set for some tough parliamentary clashes before the bigger battles with the rest of the eu can even begin. let's talk about that supreme court judgment which we got at 9:30am, our legal affairs correspondent was with me, a historic judgment

constitutionally, legally, politically as well. 8—3, was that the sort of result you were expecting, defeat for the government? i was expecting the government? i was expecting the government to lose, the reason is that they were unfortunately having to argue in effect against the principle of parliamentary sovereignty. we don't have a written constitution, it is unwritten but the court bedrock principle at the heart of our constitution is that parliament is sovereign, parliament creates the law, it makes the law and only parliament really can do a moment that lure. the government had a clever argument, built on a number of very interesting academic articles that were written following their defeat at the high court, effectively saying, this novel is not quite domestic law, it is treaty law, the rights enshrined in the 1972 european communities act are

not buttoned down to the cherry wright and eight british act of parliament, it is a memorable feast. this executive power, the argument is that you can reach in and pull those rights out, change that law using the prerogative. there were some very creditable, credible ottoman setback to the government's position, so the 8—3 results reflect the problem they had but also the fa ct the problem they had but also the fact that the argument was attractive to some of the judges. immediately after that, david davis, the brexit secretary, came to the commons and outlined what the government's response to that judgment from the supreme court will be, he said that shortly, the government would be introducing legislation, when the next few days, and it would be a straightforward bill, he said, on triggering exit.

on the issue of ourjudges, i think i mentioned links, three times in my statement that this is a nation of the rule of law, the dependence of the rule of law, the dependence of the judiciary the rule of law, the dependence of thejudiciary is the rule of law, the dependence of the judiciary is important and the rule of law, the dependence of thejudiciary is important and is watched in this country by other countries as an example to themselves. and all the people he could criticise, i don't think i am at the front of the issue. that was david davis saying it would be a straightforward bill, but we know that really not much about this practice process so far has been straightforward. there are potential pitfalls for the government. any bill, one line, to lines, can be amended, it has been indicated that labour are thinking about amendments, the scottish national party are thinking about amendments,

so party are thinking about amendments, so you party are thinking about amendments, so you can party are thinking about amendments, so you can get legislation through parliament very quickly. some pills got through in five days. today, the government have lost control of the process , government have lost control of the process, they didn't want it this way, but this decision places more control in the hands of parliament and takes it away from the government. that is going to be a concern in terms of the nature of the amendments they have to face but also in terms of the timetable because it is by no means certain that they can meet the timetable set by the pro—minister taste trigger article 50 by the end of march. the snp are saying they have got 50 amendments to whatever level is put forward the parliament, 50 amendments that they have up their sleeves. after we heard from david davis, the brexit betray, we heard from the labour benches, the shallow

brexit secretary —— shadow. the stakes are high on the role of this house in holding the prime minister and government to account throughout the process is crucial. labour accepts and respects the referendum result and will not frustrate the process. but we will be seeking to lay amendments to make sure proper scrutiny and accountability throughout the process , accountability throughout the process, that starts with a white paper or plan, a speech is not a white paper or plan but we need something to hold the government to account throughout the process, they can't have a speech is the only basis for accountability for two yea rs basis for accountability for two years 01’ more. basis for accountability for two years or more. that is the first step, there needs to be reporting back procedure and it needs to be a meaningful voter the end of the

exercise. the government should welcome such scrutiny not try to resist it because the end result would be better if scrutinised than otherwise be. that was the shadow recruit the laid—back reported secretary. he said, what a waste of time and money, the government's appeal was put the government said they needed to clarify all this. appeal was put the government said they needed to clarify all thism is the case that the government, having lost the case in november have introduced a bill at that time, they would have had more time to make their own timetable, but it is perhaps a little of which the said was a waste of time and money, as there were some very credible academic argument is that enabled them to refocus its oddments, when you get a split result like this, 8-3, it's you get a split result like this, 8—3, it's difficult to say it was a waste of money. three of the most seniorjudges in the country down the government's arguments persuasive. thank you. let's get

more political reaction on the ramifications of this ruling.“ more political reaction on the ramifications of this ruling. if the government hadn't appealed, they would have had longer to meet the timetable but they seem confident they're going to manage it anyway. parliament will be centre stage for the next few weeks but there are a few here who think that article 50 won't be triggered. i am joined by labour's pat mcfadden. what does labour's pat mcfadden. what does labour hope to achieve here? but as a meaningful voter the end of it mean? i think today is a humiliation for the government, they have been defeated not once but twice in the court in an attempt to deny parliament any say whatsoever in the triggering of article 50, and what happens after the referendum. what labour hopes to achieve is a proper debate on what happens when we leave

the european union and that will involve the questions around jobs, trade, investment, and what kind of deal we get at the end of the two—year negotiating process. that's a perfectly legitimate job and duty for mps to carry out. trying to sideline democracy?” for mps to carry out. trying to sideline democracy? i don't think thatis sideline democracy? i don't think that is the case of stuff he was in the house when we passed a referendum bill which handed over the decision to the british people, that's why we had a four—month campaign and it was a keenly fought referendum and at the end there was a decisive verdict. there were two different views as to whether parliament needed to further boat, the supreme court today has said parliament should have a vote, personally i didn't think that was necessary but that has been resolved. i think the vote will take place quickly and i suspect it will go through both houses without too much controversy. i have spoken to many labourmps, much controversy. i have spoken to many labour mps, some have said they will not block article 50, labour is

in an incredibly difficult position. jeremy corbyn and his mps to vote for article 50. i think the trauma of the court cases and his heavyweightjudges reading of the court cases and his heavyweight judges reading at the verdict has perhaps put this up into a moment that it might not actually be. ithink a moment that it might not actually be. i think there is a majority in the house for triggering article 50. but i also think that like any legislation that this is subject to debate, the scrutiny and to amendment. it isjust one line, in the end what can you change in it? white paper, that still not going to bring about a membership of the single market. let's see with the legislation actually says. my own view is the beginning of this process has not been... it's not the only important moment. the end of it might also be an important moment.

the prime minister said last week that if she didn't get the deal she liked, she would walk away, roy on the world trade organisation rules for trade, quite big the world trade organisation rules fortrade, quite big indications in terms of tariffs, lack of common standards, potentially big barriers between us and our biggest markets. i think what comes out of this at the end of it is very important and that attention may switch from the process questions around article 50 to the substance questions of the deal that we get outside the european union. i think pat is right but what labour and a lot of people seem but what labour and a lot of people seem to have forgotten is that the discussions are a two—way process. we can decide what we want but at the end of the day it's the 27 countries that still are in the eu that will also have a say. i hear lots of things about amendments, binding the government to do this, that and the other but there is no way ina that and the other but there is no way in a discussion that between two parties, that anyone canjust

way in a discussion that between two parties, that anyone can just find one party unilaterally to one course of action without any reference to what the other people, the other parties are saying. should plant have a say in what type of brexit happens? the prime minister has said at the end of this process that there will be about, they will also be extensive debate on the great repeal act, the great repeal bill which will look at the whole body of european law, to say parliament isn't involved in this process i think is not quite right, parliament is very much involved. but it's because it's a two—way process that some of the claims made by the prime minister in her speech last week need to be tested. the bar she has set herself is that she can negotiate outside the european union, the same level of access for out union, the same level of access for our goods and services, notjust about tariffs but common standards and the rights of access, outside, that we currently enjoy inside. it's

perfectly legitimate for mps to press her on how she's going to do that and critique her she fails to do that. you will boat personally to trigger article 50? i respect the referendum result, either not vote to block article 50, i don't think debate and discussion into the triggering of article 50. i think that the deal is also an important duty for us. i think the idea that parliament will somehow overturn the referendum result, which everybody in the world so what happened, i go around the world saying we should respect democracy, foster democracy, the idea this: it will overturn the will of the people as expressed in june is ridiculous. i also agree that has to be debate, there's been ple nty of that has to be debate, there's been plenty of debate and we will have more debates to come. thank you both. david davis has medically the process could begin as soon as next week. let's continue that was

another lettering. first, your reaction to the supreme court judgment, do you think it was the rightjudgment judgment, do you think it was the right judgment that parliament should trigger article 50 rather than the government?” should trigger article 50 rather than the government? i think it was very much the expected judgment. what happens now? david davis has said the government will introduce shortly a straightforward bill, but will it be straightforward getting that pool through parliament? will it be straightforward getting that poolthrough parliament? the risk is that people will try and put through a pile of amendments that would put the government into knots. that has to be resisted completely, we should have a simple bill that stays simple all the way through its process. i think that would be achievable in the house of commons where there is a strong majority in favour of that, it may require more heavy lifting in the house of lords. we are talking to alex salmond earlier copies of the snp have 50 amendments ready they will put to any bill introduced. the ingenuity of those intending to subvert the

process of exit is limitless and we have to make sure that they don't succeed in achieving their aims. but it could delay the process, but for amendments could delay it. not in the house of commons, there is majority to get pampered promotions that will enable the bill to move forward in the proper way. in the house of lords, where i cannot understand the arcane, it's a strange institution that my understanding is you can do an awful lot more and therefore the government and those who want to see xit government and those who want to see x it preceding even though i voted to remain personally, that's where we need to go now as a country, from the two keeper maximum pressure on those in the house of lords and. do you feel across the whole brexit process , you feel across the whole brexit process, two yea rs you feel across the whole brexit process, two years or whatever it is, that there needs to be full parliamentary scrutiny? parliamentary scrutiny is one thing,

but parliament derailing the process of negotiation is another. i am very well aware that the government can appeal expected to negotiate something is computed as this if they are constantly having to negotiate with parliament as well as opposite numbers in the rest of the eu. we have to give the government free hand it needs, theresa may has set out a clear programme objectives, delivering those requires an enormous amount of negotiation. thank you for your time. that is the latest from here, politicians will begin to digest the indications of that judgment from the supreme court, 8—3, that parliament must trigger article 50, not the government by it self. the headlines. the supreme court rules by a majority of 8—3 that the government cannot begin the process

of leaving the eu without the consent of parliament. the lawyer defending rolf harris has told the court that the former television personality won't give evidence at his trial over allegations of indecent and sexual assault. the musicalfilm la la land secures a record equalling 1a nominations including best picture. as bernie ecclestone's a0 year reign at the helm of formula 1 is on, the new owners have talked of resurrecting a grand prix in london. hull city have confirmed that why may and is continuing to make excellent progress after surgery on a scale fracture. he sustained the injury after a clash of heads on sunday. and roger federer rolls back the yea rs, and roger federer rolls back the years, easing through in straight sets to reach the semifinals of the australian open. more in a few

minutes. it's another busy day for president trump. he has signed an executive action that will advance construction of the key pipelines. his press secretary sean spicer said yesterday evening that he had a lot to do — with the focus on business and trade — and today on the schedule there are meetings planned with car company executives and the indian prime minister, along with the signing of executive orders later. president trump is also to have a meeting with his cia director — mike pompeo — who's finally been approved by the senate. mike pompeo — who's finally been his secretary of state nominee rex tillerson has also been confirmed in thejob. how is the ride out the car bosses getting? they won't get an easy ride. rex tennison has not yet been

approved, there will have to be a vote on this and further that will happen in the next few days. as for the car industry, it was one of the massive buts of donald trump is micro wired during the whole election campaign, accusing them to shipping jobs to mexico, making cars, bringing them back in a threatened them with big border ta riffs if threatened them with big border tariffs if they continue to do that. some of those companies have started making noises and putting some investment into cases like detroit and michigan, further west, that there seem to be having some kind of effect but it is an industry he has in his sights on much, it sounds like they have been ripped the right act. this confirmation process, he must be fed up with it, mike pompeo has been approved by the senate, there is a rumour that they would be apparent difficulty the inner committee with the fbi. a strong

rumour, there was an incident last night other not apply where there was a picture of the new director at a white house reception and the tramp goes to him and gives him what is described as a hug, i think at that stage we got an indication that perhaps it would be him, a hugely controversial character. it was he who decided to reopen the investigation into hillary clinton's e—mails ten days before the general election. that's something the clinton camp think contributed to their defeat. it made blogs on's camp, iwas their defeat. it made blogs on's camp, i was with him when it happened, they were cock—a—hoop. but the fbi also one of the agencies that has been strong on the role of the russians in allegedly hacking

the russians in allegedly hacking the us elections, something donald trump has described as ridiculous and has lashed out at them that. so it would avoid a difficult confirmation hearing, he is having difficulties in that area already. but an interesting decision to keep him in place. it does mean the investigations he has started are likely to continue, that includes those investigations into the role of the russians. on a familiar theme, a quote from him, environmentalism is out of control. today he also signed an order reinstating this keystone pipeline, it's a network of pipelines that will get all from canada via nebraska in places like that, ships it effectively down to the gulf of mexico where it gets refined. that's something that was to and fro—ing over the last few years and eventually the white house decided

not to give it the go—ahead. also, a separate one over in the dakotas, you remember the pictures for christmas of those demonstrators and native americans demonstrating about this pipeline, getting pretty violent, that has been given the go—ahead as well. a strong indication that he's not going to buy these environmental arguments. he has put someone in charge of the environmental protection agency who has been done in oklahoma where he comes from, he has attempted to strip lots of those regulations away. a particular message on the environment. we getting pictures of donald trump meeting car—makers, in terms of business which is his realm, he knows what he's about. are they going to listen to what he says

and change policy because of what he says? there have been signs already that they have changed some of the plans they were making, the difficulty for the kindest rate is it is massively complex will stop —— the car industry. the components are made all over the world, the assembly of this bit is done in one place, of that bit in another, you can't say you're going to lift... let's just listen in for a can't say you're going to lift... let'sjust listen in for a moment. you are not supposed to ask questions. you're not supposed to ask questions. there's always one. there's got to

be one. thank you very much. we have learnt nothing from that particular clip! in terms of his manner, two days in, in terms of this week, there is no change of approach. no, we are told by reporters spending all that they at the white house that he is doing this, calling people in, the grammar of what was going on was that is effectively what they call a spray, you get the chance to get the pictures and what he was complained about was preaching the etiquette by shouting out a question which she wasn't pleased about. but he is doing that a lot, that gives the television networks pictures to run, including ourselves and gives the impression of hitting the ground running, being very busy, and

getting stuck in straightaway and getting stuck in straightaway and getting moving with some of the key m essa 9 es getting moving with some of the key messages he promoted during the campaign. that would be the first bro hug from the president, wouldn't it?|j that would be the first bro hug from the president, wouldn't it? i think he has done a few of those! bro hug with the fbi director is quite something, isn't it? thank you. a barrister defending the veteran entertainer rolf harris has told southwark crown court the jury in his first trial in 201a got it wrong when they found him guilty of indecent assault. the 86—year—old who has pleaded not guilty is being tried on seven charges of indecent assault and one of sexual assault against seven victims between 1971 and 200a. and johnson is at the

court. take a screw in more detail what has been said. —— danjohnson. take us through in more detail what has been said. it began with his barrister telling the jury the entertainer himself would not be giving evidence. the qc said that because his memory of events 30, a0 yea rs because his memory of events 30, a0 years ago is not good enough, there was no point in him giving evidence. if the defendant can say no more than, i cannot remember being there, evidentiary, it is quite weak. the defence has been pulling apart some of the convictions rolf harris received here two years ago. he was convicted of indecent assault, 12 cou nts convicted of indecent assault, 12 counts of it. this morning witnesses have been brought to court who had knowledge of a community centre in portsmouth relating to one of the convictions involving an eight—year—old goal. the witnesses told the court this morning they we re told the court this morning they

were closely involved with the community centre, they knew everything that went on and they had no recollection of rolf harris visiting. part of the defence to try to pick apart the convictions he received two years ago. the prosecution has said that what rolf harris has already been found guilty of indicates the sort of behaviour he is capable of and it shows his guilt for that accounts he faces in the second trial. his barrister said, in short, we say the jury got it wrong in the first trial and we do not say it lightly. we have enormous faith in the jury system but no system is infallible. because of rolf harris‘s frailties, he has been allowed to attend via video link. he denies the seven counts of assault he faces in this new trial. thank you very much for that. nominations for this year's oscars

have just been announced and as expected the film la la land leads the nominations with 1a in total. dev patel has been nominated for his first oscar for his supporting role in the film lion. another british hopeful is andrew garfield who has been nominated for the best actor category for his role in mel gibson's film. meryl streep has received her 20th boston nation. let us go live to los angeles where peter has the latest for us. —— 20th oscar—nominated. a more diverse field after the oscars so white backlash. that is the headline. it is the most racially diverse list of nominees for a decade. last year there was only white faces. that was

a significant difference. we have got denzel washington, for example, nominated for fences, naomie harris, who you have just mentioned, and thatis who you have just mentioned, and that is what people here are talking about. the academy changed its rules after the fuss made last year to have a more diverse membership so the people choosing the nominees are different as well. that is the key achievement, i think, different as well. that is the key achievement, ithink, they different as well. that is the key achievement, i think, they will see it, bringing much more of a diverse fields at the oscars. the announcement this year was very different as well. it was pre—recorded, aimed at the digital audience, streamed on the internet, as opposed to a live announcement in as opposed to a live announcement in a theatre at the academy headquarters. 1a nominations for la

la land, it ties with a couple of other films for the most number of nominations for anyone film. yes, it ties with titanic and all about eve. .it ties with titanic and all about eve. . it certainly does put this film, this musical, this love story, set in modern—day hollywood but harking back to the golden days of hollywood from 50 years ago, it puts it in pole position to do extremely well and most people here in la think it will probably take the title for best picture. it is up against strong competition. take us through the british interest in this year's oscars. the british interest is naomie harris, nominated for moonlight, she plays the mother, the drug addicted mother of the main character in that film. dev patel,

one of the stars of lion, the story ofan indian one of the stars of lion, the story of an indian boy who gets lost in calcutta and end —— ends up being adopted. a great film. and andrew garfield, you have already mentioned, his role in mel gibson's film. mel gibson nominated for best director which is something of a comeback. he went through tough times in hollywood, ostracised right a lot of people for the anti—semitic comments he famously made a few yea rs comments he famously made a few years ago. peter, thank you very much for that. returning to the main story, the vote in the supreme court this morning and my colleague in westminster. the supreme court judgment westminster. the supreme courtjudgment by 8—3, the supreme court said it is

parliamentthat should be responsible for triggering kaiser wilhelm memorial —— triggering article 50. the government will have to introduce a bill to trigger brexit. let me talk to emily thornberry. a beautiful afternoon. what is your strategy. david davies said that in a few days he would introduce a straightforward bill. is it straightforward? straightforward bill. is it straightforward ? will you just vote for that? first of all we agree with the british public we need to leave the british public we need to leave the european union, there has been a referendum, we have our instructions. but what cracked a continuing relationship will we have? —— but what kind. we need to have? —— but what kind. we need to have the best deal for britain with the agreement of britain. when david cameron tried to negotiate a year ago, he did it on behalf of the conservative party and it failed. we

need something where theresa may can go to europe and say, i speak on behalf of the uk. i do not know what she is afraid of and why she needed to be dragged here by the supreme court. it has been a waste of time and public money. they should have just done this to start with. no one wa nts to just done this to start with. no one wants to get in the way of us leaving. we will not frustrate the process. we need to get the best possible deal. not frustrate the process. when david davies introduces the straightforward bill, as he puts it, you will say, yeah, we vote for that? i don't think so. he says he will come up with something in the next few days. let us have a look at it. it is not just, trigger wrecks it, we trust you to negotiate on our behalf and comeback in a couple of years and i am sure it will be fine and you give us the vote at the last possible minute so that we do not have a say. that is not how parliamentary democracy works. you say you respect the will of the british people. why can't you just translate it into

triggering brexit? it is notjust a simple question of going, there have to be negotiations. theresa may put forward a wish list in her speech but it seemed to me she was trying to ride two horses going in different directions. we need to make sure the horse we are on is the horse going in the direction looking after the british economy. nobody voted for anyone else to be poorer, for anyone to lose theirjob. we have to make sure the deal we get looks after the british economy over and above everything else. pretty clear there will be some labour mps voting against triggering article 50 and they are effectively going against the will of the majority of the british people. it is really difficult. we have on the one hand a referendum whether country has said we should leave as a whole. my constituency voted to remain. i voted to remain. i campaign to remain. iam voted to remain. i campaign to remain. i am a democrat and the will of the nation is what overrides everything else in my view. i understand and fully respect some of

my colleagues who say, i am here first and foremost to represent my constituency. i get that. first and foremost to represent my constituency. iget that. it is first and foremost to represent my constituency. i get that. it is a difficult compromise. you think they are wrong? i have made a different decision. i have to be a national petition as well as a representative of islington south. for that reason i will trigger brexit. but i can assure my constituents, it is not the end. we will make sure we get the end. we will make sure we get the best possible deal on behalf of the best possible deal on behalf of the whole country and we are not taking the tories‘ word for it. the whole country and we are not taking the tories' word for it. will labour mps be whipped on this? will they have to vote with the leadership on triggering brexit? they have to vote with the leadership on triggering brexit7m is premature to answer that. we have yet to see the bill, the way in which it can be amended. we need to have discussions and you will have to ask the chief whip. the effect is finally, yes, i understand what you say, you want full scrutiny, but you may end up delaying the whole process and delaying the timetable of the prime minister to trigger

brexit by the end of march. of the prime minister to trigger brexit by the end of marchlj of the prime minister to trigger brexit by the end of march. i hope we can still trigger by the end of march. bear in mind, we have had 82, 83 wasted days between the divisional court hearing and the supreme court hearing, where the prime minister decided to spend public money on this silly appeal that was unnecessary. she should have brought it to parliament in the first place so she did not need to be dragged through the courts. thank you for talking to us, emily thornberry, shadow foreign secretary. labour's perspective on this. we will discuss the scottish national party's perspective as well. we heard from alex salmond saying the snp had got 50 amendments up saying the snp had got 50 amendments up their sleeves ready to amended the bill, whatever bill the government introduce at westminster in the wake of the supreme court decision. let us talk tojoanna cherry, snp spokesperson on home affairs in the house of commons. we we re affairs in the house of commons. we were just hearing from emily

thornberry, saying, this has to go through because it is the will of the people of the uk. you do not agree? it is not the will of the people of the scotland. i would have asked whether she would support our scottish labour leader kezia dugdale saying the number one protein must be to keep scotland in the single market and members of the scottish parliament voted with the snp to keep scotland in the second —— single market. they are all over the place, we do not know what they are going to do. you are happy to thwart the will of the majority of the british people in a referendum? no, thatis british people in a referendum? no, that is not what i said. we intend to insure the wishes of the people of scotla nd to insure the wishes of the people of scotland to remain part of the eu which failings single market are respected. we never said we want to do vetoed the of england and wales leaving the eu. before christmas,

the scottish government published a proposal, a compromise, whereby we suggested the whole of the uk could stay in the single market. unlike theresa may's speech, that is a very detailed plan. we have yet to hear the british government's position. we are not in the business of thwarting the will of the people of england and wales. we are in the business of ensuring the people who voted in scotland are supported. 50 amendments up your sleeves, it sounded like a bit of gamesmanship, trying to delay the process. no, we we re trying to delay the process. no, we were elected to be a strong voice for scotland in westminster, to represent the best interests of scotla nd represent the best interests of scotland and these amendments will bea scotland and these amendments will be a positive attempt to make sure the british government takes on board the wishes of the scottish people. they will be of general benefit to the whole of the uk. we will be looking for a white paper to be laid before parliament before article 50 is triggered. there is cross— party article 50 is triggered. there is cross—party support for that,

including on the tory benches. we will be looking for theresa may to seek the agreement of the devolved administrations to trigger article 50 before she proceeds. they are not wrecking amendments, they are designed to ensure the process is carried through properly with proper scrutiny, as the supreme court has said. their decision, a terrible indictment of theresa may, her failure to have a proper plan before she embarked on this course of action, and her hostility to parliamentary scrutiny. we will make sure the parliamentary scrutiny is thorough. thank you for your time. joanna cherry, snp spokesperson on home affairs, in the house of commons. let us pick up on the implications of the supreme court judgment we had earlier on. a bit more on scotland because one of the things supreme court was being asked to decide on was whether the devolved legislatures of scotland and wales and northern ireland

should have a say in triggering brexit through what is known as the convention. the supreme court said, those legislatures in scotland, wales and northern ireland did not need to have a say. let us talk to a professor of public law at the university of strathclyde. thank you for being with us. well use a prized it was the decision of the court, not to give holyrood a say? that is not to give holyrood a say? that is not exactly what the court decided. the court decided there was no legally enforceable right for the devolved administrations to veto a bill to trigger article 50. i do not think anyone expected the court to say that they did have a legal right. what the court said essentially was that the convention isa essentially was that the convention is a matter of convention, not law. therefore, it is not a matterfor the court to decide, it is a matter to be determined like to ——

determined by political actors. the question of whether the devolved administrations are entitled to a veto is a political question which remains to be determined through the political process. the effect of what the court said was the uk government is not obliged to consult scotland, wales, northern ireland. not legally obliged, no. they may still be obliged as a matter of convention and political conventions are extremely important, as the court acknowledged, to the operation of the uk constitution. but the court said the meaning of a political convention, whether it is engaged in a situation like this, it was not a question for the court. it isa was not a question for the court. it is a question that remains to be determined through the political process. essentially, the court did reject what scotland's board advocate had come to the court to plead. the lord advocate had never tried to argue that the convention

obligation to consult the scottish parliament was legally enforceable, but he had tried to persuade the court to give a ruling on whether the convention was engaged and the court essentially failed... it refuse to answer that question. they did not say the lord advocate's position was wrong, theyjust said it was not a question for the court to answer. all right. well, professor of public law at the university of strathclyde, thank you for clarifying that. as you can see, the ramifications and implications of the supreme courtjudgment still reverberating around westminster this afternoon and i am sure will be four weeks and months to come. but thatis four weeks and months to come. but that is the latest from westminster. back to you. thank you. you are watching bbc news. in a moment, a summary of the business news this hour. but first, the headlines on bbc news. the supreme court rules, by a majority of eight to three, that the government cannot begin the process of leaving the eu

without the consent of parliament. a bill will now be introduced within days. the lawyer defending rolf harris has told the court that the former television personality will not give evidence at his trial over allegations of indecent and sexual assault. the musicalfilm la la land secures a record equalling 1a oscar nominations, including best picture. in the business news... bt saw £5.5 billion wiped off its market value this morning when they admitted years of inappropritae behaviour in their italian business. an investigation into the business found improper accounting practices, sales and transactions. bt say that this will impact profits for the next two years. easyjet say the fall of the value of the pound has taken its toll on its profits this year. £105 million less cash in the till for the airline as a result.

underneath the figures, easyjet reported solid trading in the final three months of 2016, with an 8% rise in passenger numbers. british gas will pay a penalty of £9.5 million after its customers suffered billing and complaints issues. the energy regulator, ofgem, says accurate bills were not issued on time to business customers after the provider put in a new £a0 million computer system in 201a. the boss of bt‘s continental european operation will resign after the firm was forced to write down the value of its italian unit by £530 million. bt shares plunged 18% after revealing the italian scandal would cost far more than the £1a5 million that was initially pencilled in. mathew howett is a technology analyst from the consultancy firm, ovum. inappropriate behaviour is what they have cited, have we got more detail? to be honest, it sounds like a

complex web of accounting scandal we have seen happen in the italian division. firstly, bt found out about it last year and made provisions for the error. it turns out it is a much bigger problem than they expected and that is why we have seen the shock announcement today in terms of the size of it. a little detail beyond that. information from bt it is restricted to italy, not a widespread practice, and they have taken steps to change management to address these issues. have they got bigger problems? the boss today said there was concerned they will not be able to renew contracts at the same rate, they have a pension review coming up in june, they have just acquired a mobile operator with debts, they have challenges ahead, other than this incident today. that is right. it is hard to pin down almost 20% reduction in the valuation of bt

today purely based on what happened in italy. it is a big component but we also found out there are problems with the public sector business that bt has in the uk, contracts from government agencies. this is explained by the movement away from a centrally funded procurement from government took regionally focused one. that has taken time to come through and bt is feeling the effects. you have highlighted a couple of other things, one of them is the pension pot and also the row with ofcom about openreach. there is one thing the investors and markets dislike and that is uncertainty and there is uncertainty about those issues which is feeding into the share price we have seen today. last week they announced a couple of price rises and they are going to start charging for bt sport and adding a couple of pounds to broadband. do you think we will see more increases to prices this year?

a lot of providers have been putting up a lot of providers have been putting up prices in relation to costs going up up prices in relation to costs going up but also in terms of consumers getting more for the monthly bill. speeds, for example, for consumer broadband have increased and bt is looking to recover some of the investments they are making in fibre. we need to wait to see the full results which arejuana friday for q3. —— they arejuana friday. as well as contracts with others in the uk. bt has signed a deal recently with virgin to provide the mobile service. better news on the horizon which should reassuring festers after today's wobble. thank you very much. —— which should reassure investors. in other business news... a mental health thinktank is calling for banks to offer services to customers struggling with mental health conditions. the money and mental health policy institute believes setting spending limits on cards and allowing people to set how banks contact them could help people suffering

from conditions including anxiety, depression and adhd. hsbc will close a further 62 bank branches in the uk in 2017 because of the rise of mobile and internet banking. the bank was singled out in a survey by consumer group "which?" in december as having closed the most branches in 2015 and 2016. bmw is changing its policy to permit listings on car comparison sites after a new car portal carwow complained to the competition and markets authority. bmw uk was stopping its dealers from listing bmw and mini cars on the site, but now say they will allow dealers to work with internet comparison sites. quick look at the markets. bt down quite considerably. uk shares rose as the supreme court ruling on article 50 hit a value of the pound. that is all for now. plenty more to

come this afternoon. people caught driving well above the speed limit will now face much biggerfines in england and wales. those found to be travelling at more than 50mph in a 30 limit could be hit with a penalty of up to £1,000. new guidelines on the offence are being issued to magistrates by the sentencing council. it follows concerns by road safety campaigners. our correspondent, daniel boettcher, has more. thousands of motorists are fined for speeding every year, and the penalties already vary depending on how bad an offence is considered to be, but under changes to sentencing guidelines, exceeding the limit by a large margin is about to get even more expensive. magistrates will set a sentence from a starting point of 150% of weekly income — that's up from the current starting point of 100%. the increase will apply to those cases judged to be the most serious, and that means on motorways, where the speed limit is 70, anyone driving at 101 mph or faster. in a 20 zone, it would apply after a1 mph. there is, though, as now, an upper limit forfines — £2500 on motorways and £1000

on all other roads. the changes have been welcomed by safety campaigners and motoring organisations. the prospect of higher fines may change behaviours. what it will do is act as a deterrent, potentially, but what we also need is effective enforcement on our roads, and we have fewer road—traffic police officers than we did five years ago. the tougher penalties are part of broader guidelines set out by the sentencing council for magistrates in england and wales. these guidelines were last updated in 2008, and while there are significant changes for motorists caught speeding, they also cover a whole range of other offences dealt with by magistrates. that includes the non—payment of the tv licence fee. there'll be a new option for magistrates not to impose financial penalties for cases judged to be at the lowest level of offending. the sentencing council says the changes should help magistrates sentence fairly and proportionately. they‘ re very important to ensure consistency,

so whether you're in hackney or halifax, you'll have the same approach, the same starting point, the same range being looked at for a similar offence. the changes for speeding and the other offences covered by the new guidelines will be brought in towards the end of april. daniel boettcher, bbc news. time now for a look at the weather. heathrow airport cancelled a number of flights because of the fog. the sun trying to poke out. there has been quite a bit of sunshine today across eastern and central england. more cloud in the northwest. northwest staffordshire, glorious start to the day. ice on the meadow. sunshine coming through. this evening and overnight, quite a bit

of cloud across north—western parts, with brisk atlantic winds, relatively mild. occasional spots of rain possible around hills of western scotland. temperatures around 11 in stornoway. cold air. if fairly widespread sharp frost in the countryside with temperatures down to —3, minus four. icy stretches but also the fog is going to come back. particularly in east anglia and south—east england, maybe the midlands and central southern england also afflicted by the fog. there is the risk of transport disruption. further west, decent kind of data across wales and western england, the cloud will break and eventually sunshine will come out. similar in scotland. again extensive cloud and a brisk southerly wind to start the day. through the rest of the day, the fog

will clear as a layer of low cloud works in from the near continent which could have a few spots of drizzle and snow grains falling. a little bit wintry for some of us. decent sunshine. cloudy weather for northern ireland and scotland were the milder continues to flow in. changes in the weather on thursday. high pressure moving in and the isobars pinching together across the uk. quitea isobars pinching together across the uk. quite a brisk wind from the south, south east on thursday, dragging in cold continental air. brighter spells developing as the day goes by. the wind is what you will notice, it will make it feel quite chilly. for some of us, potentially feeling a little bit below freezing. changing towards the end of the week and we can. turning milder. in london, we should be up to 10 degrees by saturday. that is your weather. the headlines. the government loses its appeal

to the supreme court. any change in the law to give effect to the referendum must be made in the only way permitted, but uk constitution, namely by an act of parliament. to proceed otherwise would be a breach of settled constitutional principles stretching back many centuries. eight of the 11 judges agreed that parliament — not the government — should be responsible for triggering the brexit process. the brexit secretary tells mps there's no going back on exiting the eu and legislation would be introduced quickly. we will, within days, introduced legislation to give the government the legal power to trigger article 50 and begin formal process of